Ah great thanks Hatter. Andy can join an exclusive club then if he wins the AO. He needs the second Slam to become a legend!

Another list I noticed when googling was the number of consecutive Slam finals. Andy currently on 2 but he will need 4 to get onto a very small list. AO definetly possible but the French is a stretch. Having said that Skybet have Andy as 3rd favourite ahead of Fed for the French so you never know.

I was under the impression the question was about who won their 2nd straight Slam after winning the first one, because that's what Andy will be doing if he gets to win the AO. And none of them had won their 2nd straight Slam including Sampras, Federer, Nadal, Borg etc. Ken Rosewall won his first two Slams in the year 1953 - AO and Wimbledon - but there was the French Open in between. Same with Connors in 1974.

As you can see, it's a much tougher task given that none of them in that list had done it in the past, so basically BigNose, you are setting Andy up for a failure here. If Andy wins AO then that would be a record. If not, there would be no shame in that but the expectation should really be low.

I was under the impression the question was about who won their 2nd straight Slam after winning the first one, because that's what Andy will be doing if he gets to win the AO. And none of them had won their 2nd straight Slam including Sampras, Federer, Nadal, Borg etc. Ken Rosewall won his first two Slams in the year 1953 - AO and Wimbledon - but there was the French Open in between. Same with Connors in 1974.

As you can see, it's a much tougher task given that none of them in that list had done it in the past, so basically BigNose, you are setting Andy up for a failure here. If Andy wins AO then that would be a record. If not, there would be no shame in that but the expectation should really be low.

While you make an excellent point. Andy is winning his first slam alot older than most of the other guys it'll be his 8th year on tour and Andy knows what the grandslams are all about and has won 2 big titles now. I think its very possible for him to make history by winning AO, because its a great surface for him, he has less pressure than he has every other year and there are fewer players coming into this season who are in form, and can realistically challenge for the title than there were last year.

Andy could pull it off. His new aggressive game style will work wonders in Melbourne. I'm sure he'll go away today with that tournament win and fine tune it so that he will be in imperious form for the two weeks that lie ahead.

I was under the impression the question was about who won their 2nd straight Slam after winning the first one, because that's what Andy will be doing if he gets to win the AO. And none of them had won their 2nd straight Slam including Sampras, Federer, Nadal, Borg etc. Ken Rosewall won his first two Slams in the year 1953 - AO and Wimbledon - but there was the French Open in between. Same with Connors in 1974.

As you can see, it's a much tougher task given that none of them in that list had done it in the past, so basically BigNose, you are setting Andy up for a failure here. If Andy wins AO then that would be a record. If not, there would be no shame in that but the expectation should really be low.

While you make an excellent point. Andy is winning his first slam alot older than most of the other guys it'll be his 8th year on tour and Andy knows what the grandslams are all about and has won 2 big titles now. I think its very possible for him to make history by winning AO, because its a great surface for him, he has less pressure than he has every other year and there are fewer players coming into this season who are in form, and can realistically challenge for the title than there were last year.

Winning your 2nd consecutive Slam is essentially the toughest in tennis and as you can see, anyone has yet to do it. It's tougher than winning your 1st Slam. Patrick Rafter, for example who was also a late bloomer, won his first Major at age 25 (like our Andy) which is a bit late in tennis years and he too had to wait another year to win his 2nd, even when he was perfectly good enough to win either AO or Wimbledon in between. In fact, he was so hot in that year (1997), the bookies put him down as one of the favourites to win 1998 AO the following year (even more so than Agassi) but it didn't happen. I guess it's the overwhelming factor of winning your 1st Slam that often gets in the way. This, by no means, suggest that I don't think Andy won't be able to do it. It only means there's a big elephant in the room and we need to be aware of it. So IMO, right now, it depends on how much Andy has handled his success since then and if he has finally overcome those feelings given that it had taken him a very long time to win his first. And if these past three months were enough for him to settle things down. Another factor and almost all the time, the players need to taste a loss at a Slam level as well before the start craving for that winning feeling again. That's when I've noticed certain players in the past had gone on a winning spree after a short or long break of down time.

My gut feeling is that, Andy's in a very good place and should be the 2nd favourite to win AO but if it doesn't happen, I won't be too surprised because I know it's the hardest job to follow up after your 1st Major win.

On Andy's chances of winning a second consecutive slam, Simon Cambers notes "If Andy Murray wins the Australian Open he'll be bucking a serious trend"

In the last 20 years -

On the men’s side, a winner of one of the ATP events in the two weeks’ preceding the Australian Open has gone on to win the title only twice. Roger Federer won the Qatar Open in 2006 before taking his second Melbourne title and in 1998, Petr Korda also won Qatar before going on to claim his first and only grand slam title in Melbourne a few weeks later.

In all that time, not many winners of the warm-up events have made the final in Melbourne. Roger Federer won the Qatar Open in 2006 before taking his second Melbourne title and in 1998, Petr Korda also won Qatar before going on to claim his first and only grand slam title in Melbourne a few weeks later.

Federe's first Slam came at Wimbledon in 2003. But then, in the same year, he was soundly beaten by Nalbandian in the 4th round at the USO. Couldn't even make the qtr final.

I am not sure how much Brisbane is telling us because Andy is obviously not too keen on giving a stellar performance day in day out, but he is usually very consistent when it comes to AO and plays very well in each round. USO was very different last year and yet, that's where he won his first Slam. So with Andy, it's all very unpredictable. I still feel very good about Andy's chances at the coming AO.

Federe's first Slam came at Wimbledon in 2003. But then, in the same year, he was soundly beaten by Nalbandian in the 4th round at the USO. Couldn't even make the qtr final.

I am not sure how much Brisbane is telling us because Andy is obviously not too keen on giving a stellar performance day in day out, but he is usually very consistent when it comes to AO and plays very well in each round. USO was very different last year and yet, that's where he won his first Slam. So with Andy, it's all very unpredictable. I still feel very good about Andy's chances at the coming AO.

And me EJ. I think Andy has learned from Ivan that you don't need to play perfect tennis all the time which seemed to be his idea when he was younger. His frustration came from not being able to achieve that. Ivan has taught him the only important point is the last one and I think he is beginning to believe that.

I think he'll win the AO in 2014. Wimbledon will be his real chance, although then there is the whole pressure of it being his 'home' Slam.

Personally I've not got expectations in any of the Slams this year. I'm just looking forward to finally be able to watch one without worrying about that Slam monkey and if he'll ever do it. The pressure's off now and we can finally just enjoy the tournament and see what he can do.